Appeal No. 2003-0257
Application 09/472,054
being associated with a defined position of the cylinder 1”
(col. 6, lines 33-40).
The appellants argue that “[a] CCD sensor may or may not be
contacting” (brief, page 10), but provide no evidence in support
of this argument. A CCD does not function in response to
contacting a surface but, rather, functions in response to light
striking its surface,1 and there is no reason for the CCD to
contact a surface. Hence, the sensors in Muth’s CCD are non-
contacting sensors.
The appellants argue that Muth’s disclosure that “it is
possible to dispose a sensor in the area of the power flow for
detecting the pressure force” (col. 6, lines 25-27) “strongly
suggests contacting sensors and not non-contacting sensors”
(brief, page 11). The pressure sensor, however, is used in the
embodiment in which lateral register stops, rather than a CCD,
are used to position the printing plate (col. 6, lines 18-27).
The cited portion of Muth is not applicable to the CCD
embodiment.
1 See “Charge-coupled device”,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charge-coupled_device. A copy of this web page is
provided to the appellants with this decision.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007